MovieChat Forums > Le peuple migrateur (2003) Discussion > Choppy and horribly Narrated

Choppy and horribly Narrated

posted 20 years ago by BryD959
9 replies | jump to latest

The narration throughout this documentry sucks. It just plain out sucks. there is none, the film makers could have definetly used more voice overs to actually capture the audiences attention and teach them something about migration habbits. As for the visuals, it was soo choppy. Did anyone else sense this? One minute where looking at this bird, then the next minute where in africa looking at this bird. The story was edited together so that there was no story at all... plus combined with the fact there was horribly little narration and actual information, this film failed to live up to what it could've been. Want to see an awesome documentary film.....Touching the Void.

what do u people think?

[–] lunga 20 years ago

It wasn't a documentary. It was a nature film. The birds used were bred and trained for the movie. I think the lack of naration was a good thing, and part of the magic. I was kind of disapointed when I found out they were trained animals. If you want a documentary, rent it again and watch the "making of" in the special features. It was great as well.

[–] Okada_Toru 18 years ago

I think I have to agree with the original poster, as I was unexpectedly revulsed by this film. I understand I am in the minority and don't intend to take away at all from the experience of someone who enjoyed it; that said, I found the overall effect to be quite cheesy. Above all the awful soundtrack is pointless and superfluous; as, to a lesser extent, is the intermittent narration. I found the entire staging process, which depends on raising captive birds to be desensitized to humans, as grossly perverse and disrespectful of the animals. This is glossy kitsch-laden packaging of faux-nature for the self-congratulating consumption of sheltered urbanites... crap.

[–] thousand_yard_stare 18 years ago

>>This is glossy kitsch-laden packaging of faux-nature for the self-congratulating consumption of sheltered urbanites... crap.<<

You like to use big words to construct long-winded and diarrhetic sentences. Therefore, you are really smart and the things that you say are true.

So get off this message board and start curing cancer!

Reverse Cutting! Fast Cutting! Random Cutting! How will he shock you next?

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] enbilal 17 years ago

This is a film about bird migration. A film, not reality. For reality, go watch some real birds.

~~~~~~

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] GSmith9072 17 years ago

"This is glossy kitsch-laden packaging of faux-nature for the self-congratulating consumption of sheltered urbanites... crap."

Or maybe, you know, it's a film. Like "Homward Bound" or "Babe" or "Bambi", none which have animals that weren't trained for the film (especially the latter one) but have just as good of an effect. It's a film. Documentary's are nice, but nature is the star. Here, the filmmakers can use appliances to make it a work of art. Sure this film wasn't perfect, but I think it can inspire something brilliant in the future.

you can't fight in here, this is the war room!

[–] nuke_houston 13 years ago

Exactly. You are right. I just posted a message that it was too bad Jacques Cousteau wasn't available to narrate. He would have said something like: As the birds fed there hungry children, they couldn't know the long journey that was ahead of them, but in the vastness of the sky, they will find their home... (but with a French accent)

[–] steph_elisa 10 years ago

I guess a cynic is going to see what he wants to see.